by William Skink
Once again the skeptics were right, Russiagate was a pile of steaming shit served to us by a feckless party of corrupt losers and enabled by people in totally corrupt institutions who consider themselves to be above the law.
Let’s start with the servers where the emails were “hacked”. Did the FBI examine the servers? No, they didn’t, they farmed out this critically important first step in the investigation to a third party called Crowdstrike.
Was there any actual evidence that Russia hacked the DNC servers? No, no there wasn’t.
Six days ago the Grayzone dropped a bombshell that Crowdstrike finally had to admit there was NO EVIDENCE Russia stole those emails from the DNC server:
In newly released Congressional testimony, Crowdstrike president Shawn Henry said that “we did not have concrete evidence” that alleged Russian hackers actually took the emails from DNC servers. “There’s circumstantial evidence, but no evidence that they were actually exfiltrated,” Henry said.
Aaron Maté breaks down Henry’s testimony and why it adds new doubt about the core allegation at the heart of Russiagate.
I added the emphasis because all the rivers of bullshit that flowed through corporate media during the last 4 years stem from this CORE ALLEGATION that Russia “hacked the election”.
Skeptics like me said, um, no, no they didn’t. Why? Because the evidence pointed in a different direction.
People without functioning brains (because they have ceded their thinking duties to the party) got all worked up about Billy Barr trying to get the case against Flynn dropped. If these people had functioning brains, and were able to objectively look at the evidence, they would see that Michael Flynn walked into a perjury trap set by the FBI.
Even worse, exculpatory evidence was withheld from Flynn’s defense team. This evidence was recently unsealed, then dutifully ignored by the brain dead partisans telling us their pussy grabber is better than the bad MAGA pussy grabber.
If you are not a brain dead partisan who supports pussy grabbers as long as they are YOUR pussy grabbers, I suggest checking in with Consortium News every now and then. Their contributors have been providing skeptics like me with excellent insights over the years, accurate insights, not corporate propaganda.
Here is Patrick Lawrence about the See-No-Evil Phase of Russiagate:
Two weeks ago the Justice Department made public documents showing that when, in January 2017, prosecutors wanted to close the collusion case against Michael Flynn, who briefly served as President Donald Trump’s national security advisor, because they found “no derogatory information” against him, Peter Strzok, the philandering F.B.I. agent later found to be shaping an “insurance policy” against a Trump victory in the 2016 election, cajoled them into keeping it open — absence of evidence be damned.
The Strzok revelations turned out to be prelude to the two other developments further demolishing the Russiagate narrative. Last Thursday Justice finally dropped its case against Flynn altogether. We now know he was the victim of a perjury trap when questioned about his contacts with Sergey Kislyak, Moscow’s ambassador to Washington in 2016. “Get him to lie so we can prosecute him,” was the FBI’s directive.
Yet worse, Flynn’s guilty plea was in response to prosecutors’ threats to indict his son if he pled otherwise. Tell me the difference, please, between this kind of stuff and the treatment of the accused in the postwar show trials in Eastern Europe.
Nice FBI we got here, huh? But since TRUMP BAD, the ends justify the means. It did for the FBI, and it did for the “legacy media” that enabled this criminal farce. Here is how the media is doing damage control:
Among the press and broadcasters, it has been a spinfest this past week — led, naturally, by The New York Times, given no one in the media dares venture a syllable for which the Times has not signaled prior approval. The paper’s report on the dismissal of the Flynn case marked the judgment down as “the latest example of Attorney General William P. Barr’s efforts to chisel away at the results of the Russia investigation.” I lost count of the mentions of Flynn’s “lying” and “guilty plea” after nine. No reference to the perjury trap set for Flynn, or the threat to indict his son.
The Times ran two further pieces hatcheting Flynn and Barr in Saturday’s editions, here and here, and a straight-out character assassination of Flynn on Sunday, casting him as some kind of pathological split personality. The Gray Lady doth protest too much, in my view.
Nice “news” rag we got here, huh?
Unfortunately, none of these disclosures and exposures and admitted lack of evidence will do a damn thing to dislodge the partisans from their Russia binky. TRUMP BAD, so who cares if no evidence from Crowdstrike, and perjury trap for Flynn, and real perjury from James Clapper, and opposition research for FISA warrants, and everything James Comey did.
None of that matters. Partisans are going to partisan.
For the media, there is a little story we like to tell our children about the boy who cried wolf. The moral of that story is that if you prank people about a threat just for the LULZ, thereby losing their trust, when the threat is real, and you need a response, it won’t be there.
WHY O WHY DO PEOPLE BELIEVE CONSPIRACIES ABOUT THE DREADED COVID, corporate media laments.
Maybe because you WELL-PAID PROPAGANDISTS spent 3 years pushing your own bullshit conspiracy about RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA while actual vectors to destroy Trump, like Jeffrey Epstein, got the kid glove treatment.
In conclusion, the skeptics were right, Russiagate was bullshit, and no one should blindly believe legacy media anymore. Their lies didn’t just try to remove a sitting president; they have also lied our military into costly wars that have killed millions, and now we skeptics suspect they are lying to us about the true nature of the pandemic.
Wake up, people. Our political system is a totally corrupt divide and conquer racket protecting sociopaths and pedophiles, dumping trillions into hollowed out banks and corporations, while telling us the economy must be destroyed to save us from the Ft. Dietrich flu.
If you are such an objective skeptic, how about two guilty pleas in, open to the public, federal court.
Flynn had the option to go to trial and discover all inculpatory evidence. He lied. He admitted he lied. He is an experienced military man who should know better than lie. This is not complicated.
Some of your posts are very good. You are making a fool of yourself on this one. If I am innocent I will never plead guilty in court. Any court. I do not think you would either.
the FBI set Flynn up in a perjury trap, that is what the evidence shows. I’m sorry your brain is not capable of understanding this reality.
That evidence was never revealed in a trial. He had that option, I only know what was presented in open federal court. Opinion and speculation are not facts and evidence argued in an adversarial public setting. I am trying to argue the facts, please do not bring brains and reality in as argumentation. Our court system has need of reform, that is arguably true. It is what we have and better than most. Flynn lied. He said he lied in open court. It is not complicated. Would you admit to a lie to a judge if you did not lie ? I would
not. I do not think you would either.
if the FBI had a transcript of a phone conversation I engaged in, and I did not recall the details of that conversation with 100% accuracy, and from memory recalled something that the transcript showed was not 100% accurate, then I would have technically lied to the FBI, and I would not compound my problems by telling the judge I did not lie, especially if the FBI was threatening to go after my family.
does that make sense to you?
Flynn had an opportunity to reveal all exculpatory evidence in a public trial . He chose to admit to lying in two different hearings. I do not know about those matters that are not part of the court proceedings. That is the basis for my argument. He was questioned by the judge before pleading guilty. If the petition to dismiss is granted, end of case. If you are not guilty do not admit to guilt. I would not. I do not think most people would, certainly not a lieutenant general in the army who was highly experienced in intelligence ( Defense Intelligence Agency, National Security Council). I am guessing he had lawyers that were advising him.
I would suggest you research this case more before claiming I’m making a fool of myself. I am not a Trump supporter, but could see early on the whole Russiagate conspiracy theory was bullshit.
I tried to describe the scenario Flynn faced where I myself would admit to perjury, but you just ignored that.
My apologies for using the word fool in my post. It won’t happen again. I will not plead guilty if I am not guilty. Court hearings are as close to being determinative of facts and evidence as one can get.
no worries, I’m pissy these days and getting into it on another blog with a real asshole. be safe out there.